Yes. After 1 season, Harrison Barnes not only had the superior year, but he did it on a more talented roster, leading one to believe that he'd have put up far greater numbers in the wasteland of Charlotte. There's no argument that Harrison Barnes didn't outperform Michael Kidd-Gilchrist last year.

But...

Which of these players addresses the Warriors' biggest needs more?

Barnes proved last season to be a better scorer, but he scored primarily off his jumper. In fact, it wasn't until the playoffs that Barnes utilized his post-up game, and it wasn't until the Warriors went small that Barnes turned to his (slightly overrated) handles and operated out of the dribble.

Now, before we delve into the scoring aspect a little deeper, let's give MKG his dues: he's better than Barnes in virtually every other aspect of the game. They played extremely comparable minutes (26.0 and 25.4), so their production can be measured fairly. With that in mind, he's a better rebounder (5.8 per game, to Barnes' 4.1), he's a better defender (0.9 blocks, to Barnes' 0.4), he distributed the ball to an anemic offense at a higher rate than Barnes did in a fertile environment (1.5 assists, to 1.2). And when it's all said and done, Barnes scored 9.2 points a night and MKG scored 9.0, so the differences aren't THAT drastic off the bat. On one hand, you have Kidd-Gilchrist getting the ball more than Barnes (since he's on a worse team), but the door swings the other way, too. One could assume the position that Barnes was getting easier looks since he was playing with an all-star forward, a superstar guard, and one of the premiere sharp-shooting sophomores in the league. Harrison Barnes could easily draw the 4th assignment on the other team's blackboard... and he DID (as illustrated by the sheer number of teams that put a point guard on him, while a specialist guarded Curry). So I'm going to argue that Barnes and Kidd-Gilchrist are similar scorers; they're just different types of scorers.

I'm going to make the case that Barnes is a better shooter; but Kidd-Gilchrist scores on the drive better.

And which of those two varieties does Golden State covet more, at this juncture? A 3rd shooter, with Curry and Thompson, or a wall-breaker who pounds the ball inside? In my opinion, it's the latter. In fact, I'd assume the position that the reason Jarrett Jack was so integral to this team's success is because he occupied that role; breaking down defenses and getting others involved by finding his way into the paint.

When we saw Michael Kidd-Gilchrist in early December, Bob Fitzgerald correctly pointed out that he had a hitch in his jumper, which is not something that goes away overnight. Still, MKG left the game with 17 points on 6 of 10 shooting (all of them, inside the 3-point line) and got to the line enough to shoot 6 free throws. He also collected 7 rebounds, a block, and a steal in 34 minutes. Barnes, who opposed him virtually all night, was held to 6 points, 3 rebounds, and 2 free throws. What does that mean? It means MKG locked him up. It wasn't 30 days prior that Barnes erupted for 20 and 12 against the Mavericks, so it wasn't like he didn't get his looks or his touches at this juncture. There's simply a lot of things to ponder when it comes to these two players.

After the playoffs, I'm not willing to deal Barnes for Kidd-Gilchrist straight up. But if Charlotte wants to throw in a future 1st or a bench big like Byombo, I'd definitely listen. Because, to my mind, MKG is the superior ball-handler, defender, rebounder, and he gets to the rim better than Barnes. In a shooter's league, Barnes has proven to be more valuable. But not by a margin that isn't beyond negotiating.Just ponder this thought for a moment: Harrison Barnes' best regular season game was February 2nd against the Suns. He scored 21 points, got the the line for 4 FT's, pulled down 8 boards (1 offensive), got 1 assist, no steals, no blocks, 2 fouls, and 2 turnovers in 32 minutes. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist's best regular season game was December 19th against the Suns. He scored 25 points, got to the line for 8 FTs, pulled down 12 boards (5 offensive), got 4 assists, 3 steals, 1 block, no fouls, no turnovers in 36 minutes. You can't tell me that's not a little intriguing...

Last edited by 32 on Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Blackfoot wrote:I think it all depends on who you think has the higher ceiling.

I am not sure.

I see it this way:

Harrison Barnes... best case scenario? Jason Richardson. A guy who can drop 23 points and gives you 7 rebounds, but doesn't really initiate his own offense because he can't go left and won't defend much better than average; he gives you hustle and intensity, but doesn't really possess the defensive intelligence to smartly anticipate his opponent often enough to be a defensive stopper. A high-flyer, an oop-catcher, a posterizer with a jumper that'll put his FG% at or around 47% on his career. In his latter stages, I foresee a corner-3-point shooter who gives you 9 or 10 points (and I'm talking in year 10 or 11). In 4 years, I predict his statline to be the following:

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist... best case scenario? Gerald Wallace. A guy with 8 or 9 seriously good years of hustle basketball before his athleticism falls off and he becomes one of those guys who tries to compensate by playing the 4 because he can't really shoot. Probably someone who will top out at around 15 or 16 points a game, with 1 season in the 18 point range. While he's athletic and semi-young, he'll be a defensive stud. Somebody who will probably block 1.5 shots a night out of the SF position, along with nearly 2 steals, and 8 or 9 rebounds. He sacrifices his body and invites contact, so he'll grow into a free-throw machine and score almost exclusively on free throws and put backs. Statline in 4 years:2017 STATLINE:16.4 points, 8.0 rebounds, 3.7 assists, 1.7 steals, 1.3 blocks49.4% from the field, 29.3% for 3, 76.9% from the lineIn 37 minutes

If you ask me, the Warriors could use the 2nd kind of player more than they could use another scorer.

I like Barnes as much as the next guy but I'd also take MKG. Barnes' handles are atrocious. It's painful to watch. He did elevate his game in the playoffs and play elite level defense but so does MKG, plus he can drive. Like 32 said, we don't need another stand still 3pt shooting threat, we already have that in Klay and sometimes Curry (when playing off the ball). MKG will have all the space in the world to attack the basket and if they close out, he has the 2 best snipers in the NBA to pass it to.

To me, that sounds a lot better than relying on Steph to create offense himself and everyone else.

Barnes is a future allstar. His performance in the playoffs showed what he can do. He rebounded well and scored well, with his outside shot proving so valuable. Nowadays the outside shot is so valuable and he has it good and will only get better.